Honestly I never look up to see if any QB or WR that served as a backup RB on NFL teams, so I don't know.

What does that have anything to do with the price of tea in China?

Feeling obtuse today? You were talking about teams averaging 3 starting udfas. My implied point in the question was you aren't Going to find them at the premier positions so your stat is irrelevant in a conversation about a RB or QB.

Feeling obtuse today? You were talking about teams averaging 3 starting udfas. My impliexld point in the question was you aren't Going to find them at the premier positions so your stat is irrelevant in a conversation about a QB.

To begin with, we're not talking about QB in this thread.

Secondly, other positions on the team have their own importance.

Let's take a look at the Patriots roster last year just for fun anyway.
Let's see where the low round draft picks, journeymen, and UDFAs were.

Offense:

QB - Brady, 6th rd

#1 receiver - Welker, UDFA, journeyman

#2 receiver - Lloyd, journeyman

#3 receiver double up as backup RB -
Woodhead (40 catches, 3 TDs - just 1 fewer than AJ;
Second leading rusher on the team in attempts, yards, and TDs
76-301-4TDs; this guy has 3 more TDs than AJ did.)
You don't think he was important?

3rd leading rusher in yards after Woodhead - Bolden, rookie UDFA

Starting Center - Wendell, UDFA in 2009

Starting RG - Connolly, UDFA in 2005, cut by Jax, out of the NFL in 06 and 07

Defense:

DT - Kyle love, UDFA

RCB - Arrington

LCB - Talib, journeyman

Nickel back, also saw time at RCB - Dennard, rookie 7th rd

SS - Gregrory, UDFA journeyman.

As a group, these guys played a huge part on that team.
Together, they surpassed all the contributions made by guys drafted between the first through the fifth round by the Patriots or by acquisition.

Let's take a look at the Patriots roster last year just for fun anyway.
Let's see where the low round draft picks, journeymen, and UDFAs were.

Offense:

QB - Brady, 6th rd

#1 receiver - Welker, UDFA, journeyman

#2 receiver - Lloyd, journeyman

#3 receiver double up as backup RB -
Woodhead (40 catches, 3 TDs - just 1 fewer than AJ;
Second leading rusher on the team in attempts, yards, and TDs
76-301-4TDs; this guy has 3 more TDs than AJ did.)
You don't think he was important?

3rd leading rusher in yards after Woodhead - Bolden, rookie UDFA

Starting Center - Wendell, UDFA in 2009

Starting RG - Connolly, UDFA in 2005, cut by Jax, out of the NFL in 06 and 07

Defense:

DT - Kyle love, UDFA

RCB - Arrington

LCB - Talib, journeyman

Nickel back, also saw time at RCB - Dennard, rookie 7th rd

SS - Gregrory, UDFA journeyman.

As a group, these guys played a huge part on that team.
Together, they surpassed all the contributions made by guys drafted between the first through the fifth round by the Patriots or by acquisition.

But it really is a subject that quite a few many fans have yet to be debunked of the myth. Too many people think lowly of the cast-offs, low round picks and UDFA players.

Think of Belichik for a moment.
He bombed on high round picks (let say first to fourth round) just as much as other good coaches, but where he made a name for himself is with the lower draft picks and UDFAs and cast-offs.
That's where he's been having paramount success.

But let to back to the RBs.
The Shanahan/Kubiak regime has been notorious for getting production out of no-name RBs.
I actually just looked up the history since Shanahan became HC of the Broncos.
Overall, the guys they drafted in the first three rounds don't compare with the no-name RBs.

So I had to disagree strongly with Arlingtontexan who said that you can't count on journeymen and UDFAs at backup RB.
Heck, the statement I made above include ALL RBs ever ran in this system (not just backups.)

If anything, a case can be made against drafting players high at certain positions where there's a good risk of injury. The return on investment had to include the risk.

It is really an interesting discussion/research/debate if we all agree to be civilized about it.

The landscape is always changing.
What worked five years ago stands a good chance to be on the decline today.
Convention wisdom has to adapt to the time.

But it really is a subject that quite a few many fans have yet to be debunked of the myth. Too many people think lowly of the cast-offs, low round picks and UDFA players.

Think of Belichik for a moment.
He bombed on high round picks (let say first to fourth round) just as much as other good coaches, but where he made a name for himself is with the lower draft picks and UDFAs and cast-offs.
That's where he's been having paramount success.

But let to back to the RBs.
The Shanahan/Kubiak regime has been notorious for getting production out of no-name RBs.
I actually just looked up the history since Shanahan became HC of the Broncos.
Overall, the guys they drafted in the first three rounds don't compare with the no-name RBs.

So I had to disagree strongly with Arlingtontexan who said that you can't count on journeymen and UDFAs at backup RB.
Heck, the statement I made above include ALL RBs ever ran in this system (not just backups.)

If anything, a case can be made against drafting players high at certain positions where there's a good risk of injury. The return on investment had to include the risk.

It is really an interesting discussion/research/debate if we all agree to be civilized about it.

On a side note, The landscape is always changing.
What worked five years ago stands a good chance to be on the decline today.
Convention wisdom has to adapt to the time.

Even this discussion about "starters" was a moved target from the discussion about moving an experienced player, cheap player like Ben Tate. I suggested that the Texans have not even entertained the notion of trading Ben Tate so that a journeyman RB, and a couple of UDFAs could be back-up to an already hobbled Foster. he saw the term UDFAs and had a "fact" that he wanted show-off even though it had nothing to do the silliness that the Texans are going to trade Ben Tate.

__________________It doesn't just seem like I was talking down to people, I was. (Runner 8/4/09).

I am predicting Foster, Tate, Karim on the 53 man. Greg Jones can run the ball some in "break glass in case of emergency" situation.

woods and Johnson have had moments, but not enough. guessing either or both will be on the PS.

Tate is not even being considered to be traded. He is the only back who has had success as an every down player. if you have aspirations of a Superbowl can't run out a career journeyman and a couple of UDFAs.

There are a lot of Tate haters on this board. Understandable, as he has disappointed in being able to stay on the field. At the same time, the wannabe GMs think the Texans could get a high pick for him. Huh?

I am not that impressed with Karim or the UDFAs. I don't see an Arian Foster. More like Darius Walkers and Samkon Gados. I think the Texans would love to get a vet back like Derrick Ward off waivers. I doubt that happens. Let's just hope that Foster and Tate can collectively stay healthy.

There are a lot of Tate haters on this board. Understandable, as he has disappointed in being able to stay on the field. At the same time, the wannabe GMs think the Texans could get a high pick for him. Huh?

I am not that impressed with Karim or the UDFAs. I don't see an Arian Foster. More like Darius Walkers and Samkon Gados. I think the Texans would love to get a vet back like Derrick Ward off waivers. I doubt that happens. Let's just hope that Foster and Tate can collectively stay healthy.

I'd love nothing more than a Ben Tate that can take over for a gimpy Foster. I'm no hater by any means, but.... I think there's a greater chance of Ed Reed playing 16 games for us than Ben Tate producing like that guy for 10.

meh....Tate is on my **** list and is staying there until he can show me something.

See, I just couldn't disagree more with this line of thinking. Two years ago, Tate carried the ball 175 times, and averaged 5.4 ypc in the process. I don't see any reason for anyone to be convinced that things have changed, and now he sucks. I know he only carried the ball 65 times last season, and while there have been some injury concerns in the past, he appears to be healthy at this moment, and he's in a contract season. As far as how he's looked this preseason, he's only got four carries and four receptions, so even if you did choose to put limited preseason touches ahead of past actual game performance, it's not like you've got much of a body of work to form any sort of opinion on. And yeah, I know he had the completely blown pass protection issue, but I also think there's a tendency to form (or change) opinions based on one horrible thing, when the bulk of the evidence doesn't support that. I don't recall any major pass protection issues on his part when he played significant minutes in 2011, and when I did a little research to try to see how he fared when playing more while Arian was limited with "Anti-awesomeness", I found this:

Quote:

Stephanie Stradley ‏@StephStradley

Kubiak: "Ben Tate played very good on pass protection." >That is a plus factor that could give him more field time.

Again, I'm not going to let one play - no matter how visible and awful it was - form my opinion when there's evidence to the contrary.

Now I'm not one of those guys who says even if Arian misses some time, he's a system back, and we won't miss him (I know there's not many of those guys, but there's a few). Arian's a better back than Ben Tate is, and that helps us win games. However I am one of those guys that says if Arian does end up missing some time, or if he just needs to be spelled now and again, that there's nobody who's on our roster, who's currently available, or who's going to become available who's going to do that as well as Ben Tate will.

__________________
Being a D-bag and being factually correct are not in any way mutually exclusive!